Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Please remove mitsuhiko/*

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

421–430 of 445 posts

Re: Please remove mitsuhiko/*

#421

Post by eropple »

davesque wrote: post #405
shangxiao wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are all valid points, if you don't like it, argue against it, don't get snarky. Edit: Yes thanks for that downvote, encouraging people to have an intelligent conversation through constructive arguments rather than making pointless remarks seems to be frowned upon by some people

The person who replied to him basically just said, "I disagree." They didn't provide any reasons for this. They were also being rude. I think his response was appropriate.

When you're factually wrong, there's not much to say other than "you're wrong and this is why." When you get saucy about being wrong...

Re: Please remove mitsuhiko/*

#422

Post by jevgeni »

furbyhater wrote: post #369
jevgeni wrote: post #360

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Using Bitcoin is basically, like using a foreign currency, with the only difference, that in case of a the conventional currency you might actually live in the country it is used. In other words, whenever you use Bitcoin you take on FX risk . This means, that Bitcoin is something you wouldn't want to store value in for the long-term. Hedging that risk will also prove a major headache, since there aren't that many Bit…

It's different than most other foreign currencies in the sense that it's variance in value is MUCH higher than your usual currency. I would consider storing my personal fortune in CHF, JPY, USD, or even EUR but never in BTC.

Exactly, the volatility is why people wouldn't use it as a store of value.

P. S. I like how you went "...or even EUR" ;)

Re: Please remove mitsuhiko/*

#423

Post by jevgeni »

wyager wrote: post #380
jevgeni wrote: post #360

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Using Bitcoin is basically, like using a foreign currency, with the only difference, that in case of a the conventional currency you might actually live in the country it is used. In other words, whenever you use Bitcoin you take on FX risk . This means, that Bitcoin is something you wouldn't want to store value in for the long-term. Hedging that risk will also prove a major headache, since there aren't that many Bit…

>This means, that Bitcoin is something you wouldn't want to store value in for the long-term. I can think of a reason you would want to. Bitcoin is strictly supply-limited, and all fiat currencies are not. One might decide that, despite Bitcoin's volatility, the expected change in unit value over time is higher than that of any (inflationary) fiat currency.

True, if we expect the BTC FX risk to be lower, than the inflation risk of the best possible fiat currency choice, then BTC would be the superior choice.

Re: Please remove mitsuhiko/*

#424

Post by scotty79 »

ayrx wrote: post #124

Even ignoring all the legal implications, it's pretty damn rude to reach out to people contributing to open source projects on their own free time without asking for anything in return and offer them a few measly dollars for hours of work.

I'd be delighted to receive even a dollar for the work I did for free. If an old lady gives you 0.50$ for carrying her groceries up the stairs you just take it to aprecciate her apprecciacion.

Re: Please remove mitsuhiko/*

#425

Post by comboy »

mpyne wrote: post #340
comboy wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do love Bitcoin criticism from people who've done their homework. Thanks. I don't think Bitcoin is meant to be your direct mean of payment for coffee. Centralized solutions are cheaper than decentralized ones. In case of Africa for example, you can have many different competing centralized payment systems. But you can fund them with bitcoin, not depending on government printed money. In developed countries, we have…

Saying that you can fund centralized payment systems with Bitcoin isn't an argument for Bitcoin, it's a solution in search of a problem. Even if you think fiat is completely unacceptable you can fund those centralized payment schemes in Africa with gold, or silver, or cowrie shells, or human urea (not making it up; https://twitter.com/UroFoundation ), or any of a million other things that don't require billion-dollar…

Transaction fees aren't relevant for average Joe. Most payments would be happening off chain within those centralized systems. You only need transaction for something like bank-to-bank transfer. With the only difference that you are also your bank and you keep full control of those funds that you didn't put in the centralized service.

I would be perfectly fine with digital currency system backed by gold. Only that there's no way to make it work. People tried. You need some 3rd party that you need to trust and you are never really in control of your funds.

CPU, storage and network capabilities are keep growing which should be making transacting those 0s and 1s cheaper and cheaper. And regarding cost of the network, it's really low based on what does it accomplish. It's just that you can estimate this total cost, while not being able to do that for say total cost of inside parties at Chase.

This is all just my opinion, but as I said, I see bitcoin mostly as a decentralized storage of value. From that, you can fund your account of 3rd party payment system (without giving them your personal info or ability to spend the rest of your funds), and then you spend your money within that system. It can offer fraud protection, insurance and whatever you want. There can be also those that don't provide it, but offer even lower transaction fees. But since it's centralized system and it's just moving data I would assume they will be able to make it happen for below 2% of payment value.

Re: Please remove mitsuhiko/*

#426

Post by lotsofmangos »

wyager wrote: post #418
lotsofmangos wrote: post #411

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cost per transaction of $19 is a fair amount of friction - https://blockchain.info/charts/cost-per-transaction

>Cost per transaction of $19 is a fair amount of friction Haha, I have no idea what that chart is talking about. It might be in cents. Even then, it seems expensive. My phone client uses a ~$0.05 fee, I think. All fees are optional. Your transaction might just take longer without one.

Yeah, just thinking about that fee graph. I have no idea of the transaction size it is based on and without that it is pretty useless.

Re: Please remove mitsuhiko/*

#427

Post by davidgerard »

wyager wrote: post #380
jevgeni wrote: post #360

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Using Bitcoin is basically, like using a foreign currency, with the only difference, that in case of a the conventional currency you might actually live in the country it is used. In other words, whenever you use Bitcoin you take on FX risk . This means, that Bitcoin is something you wouldn't want to store value in for the long-term. Hedging that risk will also prove a major headache, since there aren't that many Bit…

>This means, that Bitcoin is something you wouldn't want to store value in for the long-term. I can think of a reason you would want to. Bitcoin is strictly supply-limited, and all fiat currencies are not. One might decide that, despite Bitcoin's volatility, the expected change in unit value over time is higher than that of any (inflationary) fiat currency.

Bitcoin is strictly supply-limited, but there are an unlimited number of altcoins.

(I see Bitcoin advocates pushing people to stop using altcoins. It's unclear to me what force they can put behind this admonition.)

Re: Please remove mitsuhiko/*

#428

Post by simonstuck »

pbreit wrote: post #383
arsenische wrote: post #362

First, I want to apologize. We have received a lot of negative feedback suddenly and I can assure you that we take it seriously. I temporary disabled ALL the email notifications (even though I don't think they were a real problem) and added a warning that we are not affiliated with project owners. When my teammate is online he will probably also some of the other issues. I see a lot of misinformation about tip4commit…

You could have avoided the entire controversy by taking the entirely reasonable step of honoring the initial request to be opted out. I think sticking with opt-out is ok since it will be the difference in having a million projects or 3 projects. But, it means you have to be more considerate of the project owners requests. Thinking that the emails "weren't that bad" is more evidence that you aren't listening very well…

> "I think sticking with opt-out is ok since it will be the difference in having a million projects or 3 projects.

There is a difference between "right" and "convenient for tip4commit". Assuming that no project maintainer wants to be part of tip4commit, should they all be made to opt-out? I'd argue that it is tip4commit that have to make a case for themselves and convince stakeholders of their benefits. Avoiding marketing by choosing defaults that are convenient for you but possibly a nuisance to your stakeholders is a very arrogant and short-sighted position to take.

Re: Please remove mitsuhiko/*

#429

Post by exDM69 »

hippich wrote: post #347
exDM69 wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My country has several stupid laws but there's very little I can do to change them (apart from voting). That doesn't make it OK for someone to run a dodgy "donations/tip/contribution" service, asking for money on my behalf. This could potentially cause problems for lots of people around the world (seems like UK has similar laws too). Stupid foreign laws don't go away by ignoring them. Running an international service…

Alright, lets remove tip4commit server from picture. So to put you in jail I just need to find any project you work on, find your name and ask for donations on your behalf? Doesn't this sounds wrong to you? also, people who downvoting here - make sure to read HN rules about what downvotes are for. They are not to downvote different ideas, but to remove useless posts.

> So to put you in jail I just need to find any project you work on, find your name and ask for donations on your behalf?

No, you would not be able to put me in jail. At worst, the penalty would be a fine. But that would not happen in practice.

What would happen is that I receive a letter from the local authorities, demanding me to explain why there are donations being asked for under my name. Responding might need me to get legal advice and perhaps contacting the hosting behind the service to find out who is asking for donations and why.

In other words, that would mean a lengthy paperwork process and perhaps some fees for legal advice. That would be a nuisance.

Re: Please remove mitsuhiko/*

#430

Post by tim333 »

Vendan wrote: post #415
tim333 wrote: post #335

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The price of gold is not really determined by it's subjective value. It's determined by the cost to mine the stuff. The reason 5 lbs of potatoes cost like $5 and 5 lbs of gold costs like $90,000 is because that's what it costs to dig them up even if you prefer the potatoes.

Congrats, you just decided that gold miners are the most altruistic people in the world, charging people only what it costs to mine the gold, not what the market would bear. I wish other companies could be so generous! Also, I would recommend "Making Money" by Terry Prachet. Good book that actually explores a lot of the same ideas behind gold as the basis of a currency. In essence, the main character eventually reali…

Ah - that was a simplification. If it costs $1000 to mine and sells for $2000 then short term the miners will make a profit but long term people will build more mines. This is a slow process - 10 or 20 years but eventually supply exceeds demand, the price drops to $700 or some such, the miners go bust and the cycle repeats. But generally the price stays within a factor of two or so of the production cost.
Post reply on HN